In Ohio recently, an Amish girl was given chemotherapy by doctors despite objections from her parents, who opt instead to have faith in God to heal her. The government appointed a guardian to the girl on the basis they were protecting her right to life, a Constitutional duty of government. But yet this is also a violation of one’s right to religious freedom.

So where do you stand on this issue? Feel free to comment below after voting if you wash to elaborate on your reason for voting.

As you may or may not know, (you’d know if you read my blog anyway) in 1996 the federal government passed the Federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) which requires hospitals to aid a dying patient regardless of their ability to pay or circumstances surrounding their injuries.

A common libertarian theme is “No victim, no crime.” If this were true, there would effectively be no police vice squad. With that in mind, since I’ve already asked about drugs in a previous poll, this time let’s talk about what is presumed to be the world’s oldest profession (I still contend hunters preceded prostitutes).

A few years back, I knew a person that was a potential customer of mine, not a friend. I only say this to explain why I was interacting with him and the level of our relationship. I have a scenario that always troubled me, and I thought, why not see what others think, here.

I was calling on his place of business as I did every week, and one day he decided to tell me he probably wouldn’t be working there much longer, and why. I should point out at this time, he was probably making $12 an hour at best.

His reason was this. He was told by some acquaintance that there was a publicly traded company called ABC Oil (Made up name for this post) that was currently selling at nearly a penny per share. This acquaintance of his advised him that in short order, they expected this stock to balloon to approximately $25 a share within a few months. So if he bought $2,000 worth of stock, it would be worth $500,000 later.

I’m not a trader, but I am a devout skeptic. So of course, my bullshit radar went through the roof. After speaking with him, a quick Google search showed that ABC Oil stock purchases were a scam. But aside from that, I know enough about stocks to know two things.
1.Stocks do not multiply by 2500 times within a few months. A company worth $100,000 isn’t going to suddenly be worth $250,000,000 tomorrow. It may have happened in history somewhere, but these stories are clearly more bogus urban legend than common occurrence or even rare occurrence.
2.The acquaintance investor who was rich had NOTHING to gain by giving him this tip, UNLESS they already owned this worthless stock and needed to dump it. If it was truly going to grow 250,000%, they would have just bought it themselves.

So my question to you is this: knowing that this was most certainly a scam, that he was fairly poor and didn’t really have $2,000 to waste, that he wasn’t a friend or someone I knew very well, and he was about to get duped, (He had either already committed to buy, or wrote them a check, but I vaguely recall he was somewhat already obliged.) would you have said something and tried to stop him? Or would have let him have a dream for 2 months, then a $2,000 life lesson thereafter?

With local governments scrambling to get money wherever they can, many people are voting down levies left and right. Much of this is due to the costs that are so often associated with public employees who are almost always unionized. So with that in mind, what’s your position on public unions? Are they the problem, part of the problem, or have nothing to do with the problem? Vote now, and as always, please share or re-tweet the poll once completed. Thanks!

As I was researching open carry laws, an idea came to me. What if the police resold confiscated guns to the underprivileged, but lawfully able masses?

Guns are expensive, and a lot of poor people are simply forced to do without one for protection. But using similar criteria to other government entitlements, police could resell these guns to people who can’t afford a new gun and help these folks out?

The money raised could help the community a bit, the cops could also engage with these people by teaching them proper safety and usage as well as building trust and respect between the police and the underprivileged who are often wary of law enforcement. Plus, we wouldn’t be destroying valuable property that many underprivileged people could really use since their communities are often the most dangerous. A lesson we should have learned with the Cash For Clunkers fiasco.

Or I could just be crazy.

But this is my first blue-sky-thinking poll, so chime in and tell me what you think. Comment below if you wish to elaborate.

A common topic of debate is the idea of assisted suicide. Opinions vary greatly this one. I’ve listed four of the most common I can think of, but in a Logical Libertarian first, I’m adding an “Other” option despite my reservations because of its inherent unscientific nature. But if you truly have something completely different than the four options given, it’s there for your idea. Please chime in on this hot-button topic and let me know what you think!

Abortion is one of the hottest subjects of debate among Americans. While science can answer a lot of questions, what it cannot do is define when a life becomes a life versus a growth inside the mother. It’s akin to asking when does cookie dough become a cookie. There is no right or wrong answer to this subject, such conjecture will always be a matter of opinion. So what’s yours?

Once you’ve taken a poll, please retweet, share on Facebook, or post on some other media sharing medium of your choosing. As always, the more voters in a poll, the more accurate it is likely to be. Thanks for participating!

I have a comment on the “Forced Medical Treatment” issue. Normally I would say that the child’s right to life supersedes the parent’s religious objections. However, I consider chemotherapy to be a bad example. Chemo, though often effective, can also be very risky. If it doesn’t get rid of the cancer, then it only serves to make the patient’s life miserable for their remaining days. These additional issues muddy the question so that it is no longer just about religious objections. Anyway, I consider any case where the government (or even a hospital) is trying to override a parent’s authority for their child to be extremely suspect. Google the Jacob Stieler case for an example of what I’m talking about.

log·i·cal: capable of reasoning or of using reason in an orderly cogent fashion lib·er·tar·i·an: an advocate of the doctrine of free will; a person who upholds the principles of individual liberty especially of thought and action